A Dissertation. entitled. Exploring Learning Progressions of New Science Teachers. Kelsy Marie Krise

Transcription

1 A Dissertation entitled Exploring Learning Progressions of New Science Teachers by Kelsy Marie Krise Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy in Curriculum and Instruction Leigh Chiarelott, Ph.D., Committee Co-chair Rebecca Schneider, Ph.D., Committee Co-chair Dale Snauwaert, Ph.D., Committee Member Mark Templin, Ph.D., Committee Member Dr. Patricia Komuniecki, Dean College of Graduate Studies The University of Toledo August 2015

2 Copyright 2015, Kelsy Marie Krise This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author.

3

4 An Abstract of Exploring Learning Progressions of New Science Teachers by Kelsy Krise Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Curriculum and Instruction The University of Toledo August 2015 First-, second- and third-year teachers can be considered novice teachers with a solid foundation. The beginning years of teaching are intense times for learning, in which teachers can build upon their foundational knowledge. However, traditional mentoring programs often focus on technical advice and emotional support to help teachers survive the first years. This study set out to understand new science teachers pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in order to identify how their learning progresses. Understanding teachers ideas will allow one to think about the development of educative mentoring practices that promote the advancement of teachers knowledge. To investigate teachers learning progressions, the following research questions guided this study: What is the nature of pedagogical content knowledge of first-, second- and third-year science teachers at various points across the school year? To which aspects of pedagogical content knowledge do first-, second- and third-year teachers pay attention at various points across the school year? Which aspects of pedagogical content knowledge are challenging for first-, second- and third-year teachers at various points across the school year? First-, second- and third-year teachers were interviewed, observed, and their teaching artifacts were collected across the school year. Data were iii

5 examined to uncover learning progressions, when ideas became more sophisticated across first-, second-, and third-year teachers. The findings of this study contribute to an understanding of how teachers learning progresses and allows for a trajectory of learning to be described. The trajectory can be used to inform the design of university-based mentoring programs for new teachers. The descriptions of the nature of teachers PCK and the aspects of PCK to which teachers pay attention and find challenging shed light on the support necessary to promote continued teacher learning. iv

6 For my husband, Jeff, I will be forever grateful for the support and encouragement you provided. For my son, Cooper, you were my daily inspiration to complete this journey. v

7 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Leigh Chiarelott, Dr. Rebecca Schneider, Dr. Dale Snauwaert, and Dr. Mark Templin, for their guidance throughout the dissertation process. Their expertise was invaluable, and I have learned so much from each of them. I am especially grateful for my co-chairs. They each spent a great deal of time helping me every step of the way. Dr. Chiarelott advised me since the beginning of my doctoral studies and provided guidance in many aspects of life as a doctoral student. Dr. Schneider s expertise as a science teacher educator contributed immensely to my development as a teacher educator, and she always encouraged me to grow intellectually and professionally. I would also like to thank Dr. Chelsea Chandler and Dr. Elizabeth Kregel for their friendship and their personal and professional support throughout the past three years. Both of these women acted as sounding boards for ideas and offered encouragement when life as a doctoral candidate became difficult. While this journey would have been possible without them, it would not have been nearly as much fun! I am truly grateful for the support of my husband throughout this journey. Without him, this accomplishment would not have been possible. There were days when he believed in me more than I believed in myself, and his faith in me was my constant motivation. I cannot thank him enough for everything he did for our family and me throughout the past three years. vi

8 Table of Contents Abstract Acknowledgements Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures iii vi vii xi xii I. Chapter 1: Introduction A. Problem Statement 1 B. Context of Study 6 C. Purpose Statement 7 D. Significance 9 II. Chapter 2: Review of Literature 11 A. Science Teacher Learning: A Continuum 11 a. Situated learning 13 b. Reconstruction of experience 14 c. Learning progressions 17 B. Pedagogical Content Knowledge 20 a. Science PCK 22 b. Development of PCK 25 c. Integration of PCK Components 27 d. Value and importance of PCK construct 28 C. Induction and Mentoring 30 a. Continuing teacher education through educative mentoring 31 vii

9 b. Mentoring new science teachers 32 D. Review of Methods 34 a. A cognitive perspective for studying teacher learning 35 b. Methods and approaches for examining PCK 36 c. Strengths of reviewed studies 42 d. Limitations of reviewed studies 44 e. Implications for my study 44 E. Conclusion 45 III. Chapter 3: Methods 48 A. Researcher Role and Potential Bias 49 B. Participants and Sampling 50 C. Data Sources 54 a. Classroom observations 55 b. Document collection 55 c. Interviews 56 D. Data Collection Procedures 59 E. Data Analysis 62 IV. Chapter 4: Results 73 A. Orientation to Science Teaching 73 a. Nature of teachers orientations to science teaching 74 b. Attention and challenges regarding teachers orientations to science teaching 77 c. Summary 77 viii

10 B. Knowledge of Science Curriculum 77 a. Nature of teachers knowledge of science curriculum 77 b. Attention to aspects of science curriculum 87 c. Challenging aspects of science curriculum 89 d. Summary 91 C. Knowledge of Students Understanding in Science 92 a. Nature of teachers knowledge of students understanding in science 92 b. Attention to aspects of students understanding in science 106 c. Challenging aspects of students understanding in science 108 d. Summary 109 D. Knowledge of Instructional Strategies for Teaching Science 110 a. Nature of teachers knowledge of instructional strategies for teaching science 110 b. Attention to aspects of instructional strategies for teaching science 120 c. Challenging aspects of instructional strategies for teaching science 123 d. Summary 124 E. Knowledge of Assessment of Science Learning 124 a. Nature of teachers knowledge of assessment of science learning 125 b. Attention to aspects of assessment of science learning 130 c. Challenging aspects of assessment of science learning 132 d. Summary 133 F. Conclusion 134 V. Chapter 5: Discussion 143 ix

11 A. Vertical Learning Progressions 143 B. Horizontal Learning Progressions 149 C. Attention to Aspects of PCK 150 D. Challenging Aspects of Teaching Science 152 E. Classroom Management: The Distraction 153 F. Ohio s Beginning Teacher Evaluation Program: The Roadblock 154 G. Implications 156 a. Vertical and horizontal progressions 156 b. The nature, disconnect, and fading of teachers orientations to teaching science 161 c. Attention to PCK and challenging aspects of PCK 162 d. Dealing with distractions and roadblocks 164 H. Limitations 166 I. Future Research 167 J. Conclusions 168 References 171 Appendices A. Appendix A: Observation Field Notes Form 180 B. Appendix B: Interview Protocol 181 C. Appendix C: Example of Data Chart 183 x

12 List of Tables Table 1 Participant Information Table 2 Data Collection Table 3 Deductive Coding Scheme Table 4 Teachers Vertical Learning Progressions Table 5 Teachers Horizontal Learning Progressions Table 6 Teachers Attention to Aspects of PCK Across the Year Table 7 Challenging Aspects of PCK for Teachers Across the Year xi

13 List of Figures Figure 1 Research Design xii

14 Chapter 1 Introduction Problem Statement After many years of school reform, policymakers and educators have realized that what students learn is related to what and how teachers teach, and the quality of our schools is determined by the quality of our teachers (Feiman-Nemser, 2001a). Reforms call for teachers who provide content-rich, learner-centered, relevant experiences for their students, which promote deep understanding and allow for critical thinking and problem solving (Feiman-Nemser, 2001a). However, what and how teachers teach is related to the knowledge they bring to teaching and the opportunities they have to continue learning through practice (Feiman-Nemser, 2001a). This highlights the importance of teacher knowledge and the notion of teacher as learner. In the area of science education, the goal for all students to be scientifically literate has been prevalent for nearly two decades (National Research Council [NRC], 1996). Teachers play a critical role in improving science education and contributing to the scientific literacy of their students (NRC, 1996), and teachers are considered to be the most important factor in student learning (Committee on Science and Mathematics Teacher Preparation, 2001). They must be able to improve students abilities to be active learners who understand complex subject matter and are able to transfer what they have learned to new situations (NRC, 2000). Finding ways to teach subject matter to students in a manner that is understandable is one of teachers primary roles in the classroom (NRC, 2000). However, the task of providing students with learning experiences that 1

15 promote deep understanding of content requires teachers to have advanced knowledge of how to teach science content effectively. Despite the critical role of teachers in students science education, it appears that most attempts to improve science education have been through revision and creation of content standards and curriculum materials. Despite efforts to improve science education through curriculum and standards-based reform, there is still a need for improvement (NRC, 2007) because these attempts do not address the impact of teachers in the classroom, including how they teach science. It is believed that lack of teacher preparation is one factor that contributes to the reform problem and constrains how theories of teaching and learning are enacted in school settings (NRC, 2007, p. 17). However, a lack of pre-service teacher preparation is not always responsible for inadequate science teaching. Professional development attempts for in-service teachers, most commonly stand-alone workshops or professional conferences, are not effective at extending teachers knowledge and promoting continued professional growth. For this reason, there is a need to examine mentoring as a model of professional development for continuing teacher education after the pre-service years. Regardless of the quality of teacher preparation, aspects of teacher knowledge need to be developed continually during in-service teaching (Feiman-Nemser, 2001b). Induction and mentoring programs, as well as professional development opportunities, have been created as efforts to improve teachers knowledge and address how they teach science. However, these efforts are not always successful because most policy mandates lack consideration of beginning teachers learning needs, provide short-term emotional support to retain teachers, and fail to provide the necessary experiences to guide the 2

16 intense learning that occurs in the first years (Feiman-Nemser, 2012). When teacher education is cut short and teachers are viewed as finished products, they are not given the experiences necessary to promote continued learning. The support provided to beginning science teachers is vital to encourage sound teaching practices that improve science education for students. However, the issue with current induction programs, which fail to address the learning needs of beginning teachers, is the lack of attention to the continuing teacher education curriculum. If the goal is to increase teachers knowledge of teaching to produce effective educators, it is essential to carefully plan a curriculum that extends upon their pre-service education to advance their knowledge and address their learning needs. Formal induction and mentoring programs became familiar features of continuing education in the mid-1980s and have been used increasingly since then; however, the quality of the programs varies and few teachers experience high-quality induction (Feiman-Nemser, 2012). When induction is narrowly defined as a way to help new teachers survive their first year, its educative role is diminished (Feiman-Nemser, Schwille, Carver, & Yusko, 1999). Educative mentoring is an approach that goes beyond situational adjustment, technical advice and emotional support and focuses on what teachers need in the beginning years of practice (Feiman-Nemser, 2001b). Educative mentoring views teacher support as a component of the broader field of teacher development and focuses on helping new teachers learn to teach effectively by addressing ways to engage students in worthwhile content (Feiman-Nemser et al., 1999). Educative mentoring has provided a framework for thinking about the learning to teach continuum, specifically the curriculum. 3

17 Many mentoring programs fail to make the curriculum an extension of pre-service education. In addition, most programs are limited to the first year of teaching, but scholars suggest that mentoring should extend beyond the first year and continue through the third year in order to take on a broad, developmental approach to learning to teach (Feiman-Nemser, 2012; Bartell, 2005). A challenge that can arise when developing curriculum for a mentoring program that includes first-, second- and third-year teachers is considering the various stages of knowledge and learning needs within the diverse group. Given this challenge, it is necessary to determine the nature of new science educators knowledge about teaching, where they focus their attention and what they find challenging throughout the year. These aspects of teacher learning are essential to understand in order to create experiences that promote continued learning and professional growth. Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is the knowledge of how to teach specific content to students in ways that promote deep understanding (Shulman, 1986). This knowledge construct guides efforts to improve teacher learning because it defines the unique knowledge needed to teach science (Park & Oliver, 2008) and provides a shared language around the ideas of teacher learning (Loughran, Berry & Mulhall, 2007). PCK was used to frame this study because it is a construct that can help to identify what teachers learn as they practice (Schneider & Plasman, 2011). To help conceptualize science PCK, it was necessary to understand its components. Park and Oliver (2008) have developed a model of PCK for science teaching that includes the following components: 1) orientations to teaching science, 2) knowledge of science curriculum, 3) knowledge of students understanding in science, 4) knowledge of assessment of science 4

18 learning, and 5) knowledge of instructional strategies for teaching science. PCK involves how these components are understood and enacted in practice (Carter, 1990; Park and Oliver, 2008). First-, second- and third-year teachers can be considered novice teachers who have a solid foundation. However, this foundation needs to be built upon so they can continue to learn and grow as professionals. Therefore, this study aims to examine the learning progressions of new science teachers in regard to their pedagogical content knowledge. Learning progressions are characterized by progress that is continuous and coherent, an incremental sequence from novice to expert performance (Heritage, 2008). Learning progressions can describe a trajectory for learning that spans a longer period of time, which allows teachers to engage in successively more sophisticated ways of thinking about their teaching over a broad span of time (Heritage, 2008). Utilizing learning progressions as a framework to think about teacher learning allows an understanding of how teachers ideas become more sophisticated and the development of a learning trajectory for the beginning years of practice. Many studies conducted with new teachers focus on retention and job satisfaction. However, it is suggested that, in order to examine induction as an educational process, research should seek to answer the question do teachers learn? instead of do they stay? (Feiman-Nemser, 2012). In addition to studying whether and how new teachers learn, there is a need for experienced science educators to work with new science teachers as well as a need for researchers to study science teachers to realize the learning and teaching potential of science educators (Luft et al., 2011). 5

19 Context of Study This study was situated within a university-based mentoring program, which is a continuation of the Licensure Alternative Master s Program (LAMP). LAMP is a oneyear, graduate, pre-service program for those preparing to become middle or secondary teachers. The mentoring phase of LAMP is different than many support programs for beginning teachers because of its carefully designed curriculum, which extends upon the pre-service LAMP curriculum and takes an educative mentoring approach to continued teacher learning. The program is intended for current first-, second- and third-year teachers; the selection of this population is supported by scholars who hold the view that mentoring should extend beyond the first year of teaching (Feiman-Nemser, 2012; Bartell, 2005). All three cohorts of teachers participate in the program together. In addition, the mentoring sessions are held on the university s campus, which allows the teachers to remain connected with the teacher education institution and faculty. Collaboration between schools and universities is an important component of mentoring beginning teachers effectively (Carter & Francis, 2001), and having collaborations with an external network of teachers is also beneficial to teachers during induction (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). Faculty members who participated in the pre-service year continue to be involved in the mentoring phase and, thus, are able to extend the learning processes initiated in the pre-service year. There are four mentoring sessions over the academic year. One occurs close to the beginning of the school year, one in the fall, one in the spring, and one shortly after the school year ends. There is also an online component that provides 6

20 continuous support between on-campus sessions, and visits to participants schools allow for individual mentoring. These aspects of the program enable the program to support progressive learning in a holistic manner. This study follows several first-, second- and third-year teacher participants across the school year. Purpose Statement The purpose of this study was to determine new teachers knowledge and learning needs to determine how their learning progresses and inform the future design of the mentoring program. To do this, it was necessary to understand the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of first-, second- and third-year science teachers at various points throughout the school year. In addition, it was important to look the aspects of PCK to which they paid attention and those which they found challenging throughout the school year. Understanding these aspects of teacher learning will allow the development of a curriculum that addresses the complexity of a mentoring program designed for varying levels of teachers by providing insight into learning experiences that attend to their specific needs and function to advance their learning. While having multiple levels of teachers within the same mentoring program can pose curricular challenges, it also has its advantages, as teachers with varying levels of knowledge can collaborate and learn from one another. This study describes teachers ideas about teaching science and how these ideas progress. It did not set out to assess the teachers knowledge, the mentoring program, or the teachers pre-service program in any way. While the nature of teachers PCK will be characterized and explained, it was not the purpose of this study to evaluate teachers knowledge or assign labels such as proficient and accomplished, as would be done in 7

21 teacher assessments. Additionally, it was not the purpose of this study to make judgments about the effectiveness of the pre-service program or the mentoring program in contributing to teachers knowledge. Learning progressions are a construct to help examine how teachers ideas progress as they learn through practice. To address the aims of this study and determine how new secondary science teachers learning progresses throughout the first three years of teaching, the following questions guided this research: 1) What is the nature of pedagogical content knowledge of first-, second- and thirdyear science teachers at various points across the school year? 2) To which aspects of pedagogical content knowledge do first-, second- and thirdyear teachers pay attention at various points across the school year? 3) Which aspects of pedagogical content knowledge are challenging for first-, second- and third-year teachers at various points across the school year? This study uses a stratified sample to look at groups of first-, second- and thirdyear teachers and describe their knowledge and learning needs at various points throughout the year. It is important to point out this study was not longitudinal, and therefore the teachers were not followed for three years. To answer the research questions, this study looked at how the new teachers planned their lessons, enacted their plans, interacted with their students and reflected on their teaching. It was necessary to ask questions that required the teachers to explain their reasoning for why and how they planned and taught. These discussions helped to demonstrate their knowledge and illustrate how they translated their knowledge into practice. Until recently, studies on PCK have focused largely on evaluating PCK, but not 8

22 for the purpose of finding ways to help teachers develop their knowledge (Loughran, Berry & Mulhall, 2013). This study focuses on a much-needed approach to finding ways to help teachers develop their knowledge. There is a need for research that examines PCK from the perspective of enhancing the practice of teaching science at all levels (Loughran et al., 2013). Scholars encourage explicitly linking experiences of learning science with the practice of, and knowledge about, teaching science because it offers access to ways of developing science teachers PCK (Loughran et al., 2013, p. 223). It is clear there is a need to study the PCK of new science teachers to develop high quality mentoring programs that foster the development of PCK by tailoring curriculum to the needs of teachers (Lee, Brown, Luft, & Roehrig, 2007). This study set out to explore teacher learning and will describe the nature of teachers PCK as well as the aspects to which they pay attention and those which they find challenging. Learning progressions are explained to demonstrate how teachers knowledge becomes more sophisticated as they learn through practice. Significance The findings of this study are important because they will help teacher educators understand how to support new teachers learning across time. The results of this investigation will be used by the LAMP mentoring program to inform its curricular design and the development of educative experiences for the science teachers who participate. Awareness of beginning science teachers pedagogical content knowledge, attention, and learning challenges will allow the curriculum to be designed in a way that addresses the needs of teachers at various points in their early careers. This helps attend to the challenge of having a diverse population of teachers with varying needs within the 9

23 same program. The findings of this study will also add to the field of science teacher education by contributing to the understanding of how teachers knowledge of how to teach progresses in the beginning years of their careers and how their learning can be supported. Not only will the findings of this study benefit the LAMP mentoring program, they also can inform other mentoring or support programs for new teachers. This study responds to the call for future work that considers the learning progressions of science teachers to enable the field to design effective learning experiences for teachers over time (McNeill & Knight, 2013). The findings will help inform what we know about the knowledge of new science teachers and how it progresses to become more sophisticated over time. 10

24 Chapter 2 Review of Literature Multiple questions guided the inquiry to determine what literature to review for this study. The questions included the following: What theoretical framework allows the examination of teacher learning on a continuum? What knowledge construct is important in guiding the thinking about teaching science content? What research methods have been utilized to study this particular knowledge construct? The following review of literature outlines the theoretical perspectives for learning to teach and the research addressing the facets of learning to teach through practice. The majority of the review focuses on the teacher knowledge construct, pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), by defining it, describing how it has been conceptualized generally and for science teaching, describing its components and empirical research. Mentoring as a means of promoting continued teacher learning is also discussed. This chapter ends with a review of methods, where research on PCK will be reviewed to provide insight on the procedures and methods for examining this construct. Science Teacher Learning: A Continuum According to Feiman-Nemser, (2008) although what teachers should know, care about, and be able to do has been and is the dominant concern in teacher education, scholars have begun to appreciate that teacher learning extends beyond formal teacher education (Feiman-Nemser, 2008). Feiman-Nemser identifies four broad themes for learning to teach: learning to think like a teacher, know like a teacher, feel like a teacher and act like a teacher. The theme of particular interest in regards to this study was to 11

25 know like a teacher, which includes the knowledge teachers generate in practice. Teachers need to know a great deal in order to enhance the academic learning of their students, which requires deep knowledge of content and how to teach it to diverse learners, and knowledge of curriculum, pedagogy, classroom organization and assessment (Feiman-Nemser, 2008). Feiman-Nemser differentiates between knowledge for teaching, which is learned outside of practice, and knowledge of teaching, which is gained in the context of teachers work. When studying teacher learning in the classroom, it is important to focus on knowledge of teaching. Knowledge of teaching is gained as teachers utilize their existing knowledge and beliefs as a lens for interpreting new knowledge and experiences (Feiman-Nemser, 2008). Teacher learning is also influenced by the context in which they are learning, which includes both cultural and social contexts of where knowledge is acquired and used (Feiman-Nemser, 2008). It is important to consider the various settings in which teachers learn to teach because these settings can enable and constrain their ongoing learning (Feiman-Nemser, 2008). Certain aspects of teaching can only be learned through practice, such as making decisions about what and how to teach over time and responding to students thinking (Feiman-Nemser, 2001a). Interpreting students ideas and making pedagogical decisions as a lesson develops is something teachers gain knowledge of as they teach within their contexts (Feiman-Nemser, 2001a). The beginning years of a teacher s career are a time when new teachers have opportunities to learn about these aspects of teaching and improve their practice. However, this task can be challenging, and teachers need opportunities to work with others, including other teachers and mentors, to examine 12

26 problems within their classrooms and develop their teaching knowledge with the support of others. The notion of science teacher as learner is important because it suggests practice carries an ongoing commitment to teaching (Loughran, 2007, p. 1043). The aspects of this notion will be explored further through this review of literature. Situated learning. Following Feiman-Nemser s (2001b) assertion that despite the quality of teacher preparation, certain aspects of teaching can only be learned in the classroom, practicing teachers remain students who are learning about teaching and learning within their classroom settings. Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) elaborate on the contextualized learning to which Feiman-Nemser refers. They challenge the idea that it is possible to separate what is learned from how it is learned and used. Brown et al. believe situations are essential for learning, and different learning experiences can produce different results. Brown et al. explain that in order for conceptual knowledge to be useful, it needs to be understood within the community or culture in which it is used. They note an interconnection between activity, concept, and culture in which there cannot be an understanding of one without the other; the dynamic between the three is what allows for learning to occur (Brown et al., 1989). Textbook and prototypical examples do not provide the learner with the authentic experiences necessary for true understanding (Brown et al., 1989). Simply providing the learner with hypothetical situations is not sufficient. The learning activity must be immersed within the culture so that concepts can be understood. The authentic experiences to which Brown et al. refer include activities of the domain that are framed by its culture and are coherent, meaningful and 13

27 purposeful. Most simply described, authentic activities are the ordinary practices of the culture (Brown et al., 1989, p. 34). The most meaningful context for an in-service teacher is his or her own classroom (Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999). While pedagogical content knowledge begins to develop in pre-service programs where a framework is constructed, research indicates that the degree to which this translates to teachers understanding of their classrooms depends upon their learning experiences within the context of their classrooms (Adams & Krockover, 1997). Adams and Krockover s research suggests that the framework teachers develop in pre-service programs is emergent over time. This supports the notion that teacher education is cut short when new teachers are viewed as finished products and argues for the need of a curriculum that continues into the in-service years of teaching to develop knowledge within the context of one s classroom. Literature addressing the science teacher as learner suggests that during the induction phase, teachers need genuine support to guide them in the task of identifying their learning needs and working to develop their knowledge about teaching and learning science (Loughran, 2007). This suggests that teachers learning should progress as they participate as learners within their classrooms. Reconstruction of experience. It is within the situated learning experience that teachers can reconstruct their previous experiences. The idea of reconstruction of experience comes from Dewey s (1916) belief that knowledge cannot be transmitted; it is constructed and reconstructed consciously. According to Dewey, the knowledge of teaching gained through practice should be constructed and reconstructed by the learner, thus emphasizing the importance of the notion of teacher as learner. 14

28 Dewey (1904) specifically provides his beliefs on teacher education when he states the following: Ultimately there are two bases upon which the habits of a teacher as a teacher may be built up. They may be formed under the inspiration and constant criticism of intelligence, applying the best that is available. This is possible only where the would-be teacher has become fairly saturated with his subject-matter, and with his psychological and ethical philosophy of education. Only when such things have become incorporated in mental habit, have become part of the working tendencies of observation, insight, and reflection, will these principles work automatically, unconsciously, and hence promptly and effectively. And this means that practical work should be pursued primarily with reference to its reaction upon the professional pupil in making him a thoughtful and alert student of education, rather than to help him get immediate proficiency. (p. 15) Learning through practice provides an opportunity for the teacher to continue as a professional pupil and continue to develop habits that allow him or her to be an effective educator. It is not realistic to believe teachers will achieve immediate proficiency before they experience teaching in classrooms of their own. For this reason, it is necessary to continue to foster teachers growth throughout the beginning years of teaching and beyond. Dewey believes teachers cannot grow as professionals unless they are active students. Dewey (1938) emphasizes the view of teaching and learning as a continuous reconstruction of experience that requires the educator to look ahead and consider every experience as one that influences future experiences. His philosophy of education is 15

29 centered on this idea, made obvious by his definition of education which states, It is that reconstruction or reorganization of experience which adds to the meaning of experience, and which increases ability to direct the course of subsequent experience (Dewey, 1916, p. 45). When an experience is complete and the learner gains knowledge as result, this is not the end. Continuity is a key factor; the learner must use the knowledge gained to direct future experiences. This is why viewing new teachers as finished products without learning needs is a critical mistake. As Dewey (1938) explains, the principle of continuity of experience is involved in differentiating between experiences that are worthwhile and those that are not. An experience modifies the one who undergoes that experience, and the modification then affects the quality of the subsequent experience (Dewey, 1938). According to Dewey, central to this principle is the concept that an experience both takes up something from previous experiences and modifies the quality of those that come after. The learner is then different as he or she enters future experiences. Therefore, teachers are not simply learning more; they are learning to think about aspects of teaching in new ways. Dewey (1897) believes education must be conceived as a continuing reconstruction of experience; that the process and the goal of education are one and the same thing (p. 13). He states, The child s present experience is in no way selfexplanatory. It is not final, but transitional. It is nothing complete in itself, but just a sign or index of certain growth-tendencies (Dewey, 1900, p. 14). A key to this component of Dewey s (1916) experiential learning theory is the ability of the immature individual to adapt in order to grow, which he calls plasticity. He explains that plasticity is not the capacity of one to change based on external pressures, but the ability for an individual to 16

30 learn from experience and use that experience to deal with later situations, which includes modifying actions as a result of prior experiences and the ability to develop dispositions. Because of this, Dewey stresses that plasticity is essential for the acquisition of habits. Dewey describes a habit as something deeper than just a fixed way of doing something a habit includes the formation of both emotional and intellectual attitudes (Dewey, 1938). He also indicates that a habit marks an intellectual disposition as a result of plasticity (Dewey, 1916, p. 204). Plasticity is vital for teachers to continue to learn through practice because it allows novice teachers to reconstruct their experiences, develop a deeper understanding of how to teach, and grow as an educator. Learning progressions. As explained in the previous section, the view of promoting continued teacher learning is grounded in Dewey s idea of educative experiences and the reconstruction of those experiences. These educative experiences change the teachers ability to participate in a knowledge community, consider how past experiences affect present and future ones, and emphasize the situational influence on one s experiences. The idea of learning progressions is used to determine how these educative experiences should be organized and is grounded in Dewey s ideas and further developed in Bruner s (1960) notion of the spiral curriculum. As a spiral curriculum develops, it repeatedly revisits basic ideas, building upon them each time and allowing the learner to reconstruct his or her previous experiences. The goal is to challenge the learner as the curriculum becomes progressively more advanced and as time goes on and ideas are revisited. Bruner (1960) asserts, curriculum ought to be built around the great issues, principles, and values that a society deems worthy of the continual concern of its members (p. 52). In the case of science teaching, the curriculum for learning to teach 17

31 should be built around the core components of what it means to teach science to students in ways that allow them to develop a deep understanding of the content. In this study, these core components are outlined using PCK as a framework and will be discussed further in the following sections. In addition to the spiral curriculum, Bruner refers to two ideas that are important to think about for continued teacher learning. One is intellectual development, which includes the fundamental ideas and logical structure of a domain. In this study, PCK is the framework in which the knowledge of teaching science is framed. The other dimension of Bruner s theory is the act of learning. He describes three aspects of the act of learning. One is the acquisition of new information, which, at the very least, is refinement of previous knowledge. Transformation is the second aspect of the act of learning, which Bruner describes as the process of manipulating information to fit new tasks (p. 48). The third aspect of the act of learning is evaluation, in which the learner checks to determine whether the way they manipulated the information was appropriate for the task. In this case, the learner must reflect on how he or she utilized the knowledge. It is important to point out that this study focuses on intellectual development in regard to how science teachers PCK progresses throughout their early careers. However, this study does not address the act of learning, as it does not examine how teachers acquire, transform, and evaluate their knowledge throughout the learning process. The idea of learning progressions is not new, but rather a newer term to refer to the type of learning that occurs within a spiral curriculum and the manner in which 18

32 instruction can be planned to promote the reconstruction of experiences. Thinking of teacher learning as a progression allows one to describe a trajectory for learning that allows teachers to engage in successively more sophisticated ways of thinking about their teaching over a broad span of time (Heritage, 2008). This is characterized by progress that is continuous and coherent, an incremental sequence from novice to expert performance that is mediated by instruction (Heritage, 2008). As teachers learning progresses, they acquire adaptive expertise when they evolve their core competencies and continually expand the breadth and depth of their expertise (Bransford et al., 2006). Schneider and Plasman (2011) conducted an extensive review of studies that looked at science teachers PCK. The studies reviewed spanned across the various professional phases of science teachers. Schneider and Plasman s findings support the use of learning progressions to think about science teacher learning. When using PCK as a construct for looking at teachers ideas, they found that their thinking did become progressively more sophisticated over a broad span of time, and they were able to identify a sequence of changes in teachers ideas. Viewing teacher learning as a continuous process takes on a holistic practicebased approach for learning to teach and becoming adaptive experts (Hollins, 2011). This includes going beyond standards for quality teaching and a focusing on knowledge, skills, and understanding. With this in mind, the goal for teachers is to change over time and to come to know things in a new way, not just know more or meet a prescribed standard. This holistic approach would need to involve a collaborative network, including other beginning teachers and university faculty, to extend upon pre-service education and continue the development of professional knowledge. Previous research indicates that 19

33 science teacher learning does progress over time (Lee, Brown, Luft, & Roehrig, 2007); however, it is important to know how it progresses in order to construct experiences to help promote this progression. Pedagogical Content Knowledge: What Teachers Need to Know When thinking about teacher learning as a progression, it is important to understand which knowledge is progressing and have a clear idea of the knowledge construct. One of the components of knowledge of teaching, as described by Feiman- Nemser, is knowing ones content and how to teach it to diverse learners, which is situated within one s context and gained through practice. This type of knowledge is also known as Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), a term coined by Lee Shulman (Shulman, 1986). PCK has become a widely accepted academic construct (Berry, Loughran, & van Driel, 2008) and a useful framework for science education research (Friedrichsen, van Driel & Abell, 2011). This study aims to examine the nature of teachers knowledge of how to teach science; although other types of teacher knowledge are important, PCK is the most appropriate knowledge construct to utilize for this aim. Examining PCK is one approach to studying teacher knowledge, specifically how they translate their subject matter knowledge into classroom curricular events (Carter, 1990). However, it is important to distinguish between practical teaching knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge when looking at teacher learning because these terms are often used interchangeably. Practical knowledge is considered a teachers knowledge of classroom situations and the dilemmas they face teaching in these settings (Carter, 1990). Pedagogical content knowledge is to a greater extent grounded in disciplines and formulations related to school curriculum and the collective wisdom of the profession 20

34 than practical knowledge (Carter, 1990, p. 306). However, it is important to point out that even though one aspect of PCK is the enactment of knowledge, the teacher must understand the components of PCK in order for them to be enacted as classroom events (Carter, 1990). Situated learning is vital for the development of PCK because it is through the authentic activities described by Brown et al. (1989) that PCK is cultivated. Shulman first described PCK as a blend of knowledge of one s content and knowledge of the teaching process (Shulman, 1986). This type of knowledge is imperative because mere content knowledge is likely to be as useless pedagogically as content-free skill (Shulman, 1986, p. 8). PCK is not just knowledge of subject matter, but also how that subject matter is taught (Shulman, 1986). While teachers gain more contextualized knowledge of students, they are able to deepen their PCK to enrich their curriculum and deal more effectively with topics and concepts that students find particularly difficult (Feiman- Nemser, 2001a). PCK includes the most useful forms of representation of topics regularly taught in one s subject area and the most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations that the teacher can use to convey the subject matter so it is understandable to others (Shulman, 1986). Through PCK, particular topics can be adapted for the diverse learners and interests that compose a classroom (Shulman, 1986). Shulman stresses that there is not simply one way to represent subject matter, which requires teachers to have a variety of methods for representing content. Some of these come from research and others come from practice (Shulman, 1986). In addition to knowledge of representing subject matter, PCK includes an understanding of what makes 21

35 certain topics more difficult than others and the conceptions and preconceptions students bring to the learning experience (Shulman, 1986). This includes identifying when preconceptions are misconceptions and implementing strategies that change the understanding of the learner (Shulman, 1986). Grossman (1990) formalized Shulman s conceptualization of PCK by framing PCK into four central components, which include: 1) conceptions of purposes for teaching subject matter; 2) knowledge of students understanding; 3) curricular knowledge; and 4) knowledge of instructional strategies. While these ideas are consistent with Shulmans original definition of PCK, Grossman began to develop a framework to categorize and describe its various components. Her ideas will be carried forward and further defined as scholars begin to develop content-specific frameworks for PCK. Science PCK. While similar to Grossman s conceptualization of PCK, Magnusson, Krajcik and Borko (1999) look at PCK specific to science teaching and add a fifth component to their PCK model. Magnusson et al. added to Grossman s model teachers knowledge and beliefs about assessment in science, which was originated from Tamir (1988). Park and Oliver (2008) developed another widely accepted model of science teacher PCK. While Magnusson et al. s and Park and Oliver s models are similar, the focus of each model is different. Magnusson et al. focus on the sources of the PCK components, while Park and Oliver go further and also identify the integrative nature of the components and illustrate the relationships among the five components, which are further conceptualized by Park and Chen (2012) and will be discussed in a later section. 22

36 After reviews and analysis of the literature on PCK, Park and Oliver created a comprehensive working definition of PCK. They define PCK as teachers understanding and enactment of how to help a group of students understand specific subject matter using multiple instructional strategies, representations, and assessments while working within the contextual, cultural, and social limitations in the learning environment (Park & Oliver, 2008, p. 264). This definition of PCK mentions both the understanding and enactment of PCK, which highlights the complexity of the knowledge construct. In the remainder of this section, the following PCK components from Park and Oliver s model will be described further: 1) orientations to teaching science; 2) knowledge of science curriculum; 3) knowledge of students understanding in science; 4) knowledge of assessment of science learning; and 5) knowledge of instructional strategies for teaching science. In addition, the integrative nature, development and importance of the PCK construct will be discussed. Orientation to teaching science. This component includes teachers knowledge and beliefs about their purposes and goals for teaching science at a particular level (Magnusson et al., 1999). A teacher s orientation would guide his or her instructional and curricular decisions as well as the ways they assess student learning (Borko and Putnam, 1996). Several different orientations have been defined for science teachers, each categorized by their goals and the nature of instruction associated with the orientation. Magnusson et al. identified nine orientations, including process, academic rigor, didactic, conceptual change, activity-driven, discovery, project-based science, inquiry, and guided inquiry. While this study does not focus on orientations themselves, 23

37 it is important to be aware of the various orientations and understand how the orientations impact the instructional decisions of the teacher. Knowledge of science curriculum. This component of PCK includes the knowledge of curricular goals and objectives and the knowledge of specific curricular programs (Magnusson et al., 1999). Knowledge of goals and objectives includes how the teacher articulates these guidelines across topics (Magnusson et al., 1999) and the teacher s knowledge about the vertical curriculum, including what students have learned previously and what they are expected to learn in the future (Grossman, 1990). In addition, knowledge of science curriculum includes how individual topics relate to the science curriculum as a whole, which allows teachers to identify core concepts necessary for conceptual understanding (Park & Oliver, 2008). It is also crucial for teachers to know how science standards can serve as a source of goals and objectives (Magnusson et al., 1999). This category also includes knowledge of programs and materials that are relevant to teaching specific science topics (Magnusson et al., 1999). Knowledge of students understanding in science. This component involves knowledge of the requirements for learning science content, including knowledge about the prerequisite knowledge necessary for students to learn science and knowledge of variations in approaches to learning based on developmental level, ability level, learning styles, motivation, and need (Magnusson et al., 1999; Park & Oliver, 2008). This component also includes knowledge of areas of student difficulty, including why certain concepts are difficult for students to understand and ways to address common misconceptions (Magnusson et al., 1999). 24